God Should Remain in the Pledge of Allegiance Essay -- Argumentative P

immortal Should Remain in the P guidege of homage One of the to the highest degree controversial issues, if Under God should remain in the pledge, and if children should be required to say it, went to court a few weeks ago. The argument was brought to court by Michael Newdow, the become to the girl on whose behalf the lawsuit was brought forward. Newdow argued in court and on many different public speaking occasions that knowing his child is being led to say One nation under God on a daily basis makes him feel Disenfranchised. (Hamilton, Marci A. CNN Special). He points out that The Pledge, which has liberty for in all is being used to inculcate his daughter in a religious worldview he cannot accept. (Hamilton, Marci A. CNN Special). This means that the state is trying to educate his daughter on religion, and therefore Under God is unconstitutional. Michael Newdow does not have hands of his daughter he is an atheist who feels his daughter is not being treated fairly because she is of the nonage belief in religion. His wife a born over again Christian, says their daughter has no trouble including God in the Pledge of Allegiance. Their daughter is in the stake grade, she has informed her mother that she is comfortable reciting the pledge, her father made this maintain based on his own feelings. As long as the statement Under God is not unwraping anyone it should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance to be recited by all willing students and teachers.The constitution assures immunity to anyone who displeases any other human beings being in practicing their own religious beliefs or if they were to offend the religious views of others, if they are the majority or minority. The constitution does not however guarantee an privilege from doing what socie... ... opinion. The words Under God is not meant to directly offend anyone. It should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance for those willing participants to recite. BibliographyAger, Susan. Pledge of Allegianc e Deserves Attention. Monterey earth The Herald. 2 April 2004 Hamilton, Marci A. Why the Department of Justice is wrong to backing Under God. Posted 210 PM EST. 26 March 2004. Harrison, Maureen. Gilbert, Steve. landmark Decisions of the United States Supreme Court II. La Jolla, California. procure 1992. By Excellent Books. Muqaribu, Mudhillun. Letter. New York Times. Published 3/29/2004. Late Edition. Final Section A. tower 6. Page 20. Taylor, Bonnie B. Education and the Law. Contemporary Legal Issues. Santa Barbara, California. Copyright 1996. Pg. 252-253 God Should Remain in the Pledge of Allegiance Essay -- Argumentative PGod Should Remain in the Pledge of Allegiance One of the most controversial issues, if Under God should remain in the pledge, and if children should be required to say it, went to court a few weeks ago. The argument was brought to court by Michael Newdow, the father to the girl on whose behalf the lawsuit was brought forward. Newdow argued in court and on many different public speaking occasions that knowing his child is being led to say One nation under God on a daily basis makes him feel Disenfranchised. (Hamilton, Marci A. CNN Special). He points out that The Pledge, which has liberty for all is being used to inculcate his daughter in a religious worldview he cannot accept. (Hamilton, Marci A. CNN Special). This means that the state is trying to educate his daughter on religion, and therefore Under God is unconstitutional. Michael Newdow does not have custody of his daughter he is an atheist who feels his daughter is not being treated fairly because she is of the minority belief in religion. His wife a born again Christian, says their daughter has no trouble including God in the Pledge of Allegiance. Their daughter is in the second grade, she has informed her mother that she is comfortable reciting the pledge, her father made this claim based on his own feelings. As long as the statement Under God is not of fending anyone it should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance to be recited by all willing students and teachers.The constitution assures immunity to anyone who offends any other human being in practicing their own religious beliefs or if they were to offend the religious views of others, if they are the majority or minority. The constitution does not however guarantee an exemption from doing what socie... ... opinion. The words Under God is not meant to directly offend anyone. It should remain in the Pledge of Allegiance for those willing participants to recite. BibliographyAger, Susan. Pledge of Allegiance Deserves Attention. Monterey Country The Herald. 2 April 2004 Hamilton, Marci A. Why the Department of Justice is wrong to support Under God. Posted 210 PM EST. 26 March 2004. Harrison, Maureen. Gilbert, Steve. Landmark Decisions of the United States Supreme Court II. La Jolla, California. Copyright 1992. By Excellent Books. Muqaribu, Mudhillun. Letter. New York Times. Pu blished 3/29/2004. Late Edition. Final Section A. Column 6. Page 20. Taylor, Bonnie B. Education and the Law. Contemporary Legal Issues. Santa Barbara, California. Copyright 1996. Pg. 252-253